User talk:OhNoPeedyPeebles

Tabasco Sauce on the Lusitania

OhNoPeedyPeebles,

Thanks for adding the trivia about Tabasco sauce on the Lusitania. I work for the company that makes Tabasco sauce. Can you tell me the source of this information (book or article title), as I'd like to obtain a copy for my files. Sincerely, --Skb8721 00:01, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Covered cupboard

Hi OhNo,

I am rather surprised that you reverted my edit to cupboard. Please explain on Talk:Cupboard. --Slashme 09:24, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Cupboard

Hi Peedy. Just saw your post on the cupboard/covered isssue. All good then! --Slashme 11:02, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Charles V succession Box

What do you mean by saying that I sound muddled? I was just asking why it says Charles was only King of Germany until 1531? Emperor001 19:30, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Charles V

What do you mean he was never King of Spain? That might not have been an official title, but many consider the Spanish monarchy to start with him because that is when all of what is now Spain came under one throne. Also, in a book I read called The Life and Times of Martin Luther, there was a letter that was either written to Luther by Charles or by someone representing him. That letter listed his various titles including King of Spain. Emperor001 23:39, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nationalities of UK golfers

I'm reverting your changes of nationalities in infoboxes of UK golfers. The European Tour uses the flags of the four constituent countries of the United Kingdom on its golfer's pages and all other UK golfers follow the same format.Tewapack 21:11, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What's wrong with getting it right?

As the Spain article says: "In 1469, the crowns of the Christian kingdoms of Castile and Aragón were united by the marriage of Isabella and Ferdinand."
Also note that a disamb page like this one refers to Charles as "Holy Roman Emperor (as Charles V) and King of Spain (as Charles I)."
So my honest question of curiosity is, why "King of Aragón and Castile" and not a reminder of the unison? I am trying to understand the sensitivities in this area.
Cheers, Iterator12n ^Talk 00:54, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, I recognize that Aragon and Castile each one independently had to consent to the kingship of Charles. This is a rather normal construct, at least for the 15th-18th century. But consent by say A, B, and C does not necessarily make one a “[Ruler] of A, B and C.” Instead, it makes one “[Ruler] of [collective name for A+B+C]. ” -- Iterator12n ^Talk 01:47, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response. Indeed, the present version of the Charles V is fine. Still, the "King of Spain" matter is worth two notes. (1) Columbus claimed American lands in the name of "the King and Queen of Spain," not the King or Queen of Aragon or Castile. (2) Around the middle of the 16th Century, "King of Spain" was in general use, see for instance the Dutch national anthem, and P.C. Hooft's De Nederlandse Histooriën (at least in my abridged version). (Of course, Hooft wrote his work 75 years later, but he is said to have been extremely precise in his facts and words.) Cheers. -- Iterator12n ^Talk 02:21, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, evidence of the primacy of "Spain" is right in front of us, in the Wikipedia article of Charles V where it shows a coin from the early 1540s with "Hispaniarum" on it! A second case is Charles's appointment of Philip in 1543 to "Regent of Spain." By that time, apparently the power of Charles already had become absolute enough to drop the niceties of "Aragon and Castile." -- Iterator12n ^Talk 05:25, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk Page

Please leave messages on the talk page, not the userpage. I didn't notice your message until I checked my Userpage, which I rarely do. Emperor001 20:21, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You seem cross. --OhNoPeedyPeebles (talk) 22:00, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Arnold

Thank you for your contributions to the Arnold page. I am afraid, however, that I have reverted them all. Can we talk before you go in and edit again (i.e. lets chat on the discussion page for Matthew Arnold). I think some of your edits may be of value, but I had no way to revert them piecemeal. I am afraid, however, that several of your edits have resulted in a rather unhealthy loss of "tedious and poorly written" information. Arnold was a school inspector. That is an extremely important part of his biography. His credentials for speaking about education (which is arguably today a more important aspect of Arnold's biography than his brief career as a poet) rely to some extent on his professional relationship to the educational process. No matter how tedious that might be to you, I feel it needs to be there. As to it being poorly written, well lets look at writing it better, rather than taking it out. Mddietz (talk) 19:43, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've actually gone in and reinstated most of your edits. Frankly, the only one I seriously had problems with was the removal of the "tedious and poorly written" paragraph, which, as I point out, I have asked you to reconsider. Have you read Honan or Collini or any of the various bios on Arnold? It might help if we start from those. Mddietz (talk) 20:26, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edits

You edited Frederic William Maitland which is a page I watch and someone else reverted it... I then went through and looked at a long list of your edits. I appreciate your flamboyance and can't help but laugh at some of your edits (I had to laugh and leave Pub quiz alone where you added the photo and caption, for example). Anyway, I would just like to suggest that you exercise your wit on talk pages and use your excellent editing skills in articles. You are extremely capable and smart, so I hope you stay around and continue to protect and cultivate Wikipedia... in simplicity. Just as an example of what I think you ought not to do, perhaps you could look at the change you made to the translation of the latin motto in Eltham College‎. The 'parents paying the fees' is clearly not part of the quote, and the translation you changed had a very different meaning from the one you left behind.

Because you clearly value Wikipedia and spend a lot of effort trying to improve it, I hope you understand what I am suggesting... anyway, now that I have sounded cross for a moment, let me note that I thought your recent edits of Orlando Figes, Andy Townsend, and Twitchen, Devon amply evidence your capacity for useful, thoughtful edits that add information or remove extraneous junk. Carry on! --Matthew K (talk) 02:05, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

April 2008

Welcome, and thank you for your attempt to lighten up Wikipedia. However, this is an encyclopedia and the articles are intended to be serious, so please don't make joke edits, as you did to James Joyce. Readers looking for serious articles will not find them amusing. If you'd like to experiment with editing, try the sandbox, where you can write (almost) whatever you want. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 22:00, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Ann Winterton

Your recent contribution(s) to the Wikipedia article Ann Winterton are very much appreciated. However, you did not provide references or sources for your information. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and as you might be aware there is currently a drive to improve the quality of Wikipedia by encouraging editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. If sources are left unreferenced, it may count as original research, which is not allowed. Can you provide in the article specific references to any books, articles, websites or other reliable sources that will allow people to verify the content in the article? You can use a citation method listed at How to cite sources. Thanks! ^Tom _Phil 12:31, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

May 2008

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did to Chargoon, you will be blocked from editing. SchuminWeb (Talk) 18:32, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did to Common misconceptions, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 18:42, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An opinion without sources doesn't belong here. We report majority and significant minority opinions only. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 12:42, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Motto of Bradfield College

I've tried to add the archaic version of the motto several times and it keeps being deleted. As an Old Bradfieldian I know what I'm talking about, so please can you add that "Blessed art thou, oh Lord, which teach me thy statutes" is the archaic translation taught to generations of pupils at Bradfield, or let me add it and then just leave it alone since both translations are correct? Just had to get that off my chest!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Craig Mathieson (talk • contribs) 23:57, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Lansley

On Lansley's talk page you claim "he's changed his cut and swung suddenly to the right".
Is that a political observation? ;-)
Arjayay (talk) 09:02, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Polymath

Oops, sorry, not vandalism, but think it needs some different treatment. Watch the page. --Dweller (talk) 14:17, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Bollocks

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Bollocks. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bollocks. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:07, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Graham Goodlad

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Graham Goodlad. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Graham Goodlad. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:14, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chatting about foxes' ears

Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Rüppell's Fox are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you.--McGeddon (talk) 12:24, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

April 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Japanese gunboat Saga, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:39, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article John Gummer, Baron Deben, please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:59, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Worcestershire sauce. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:06, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:List of common misconceptions. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.--Asher196 (talk) 22:18, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Thomas Harrison (soldier) are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. SummerPhD (talk) 23:42, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:P1010025-3.JPG

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:P1010025-3.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status and its source. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously.

If you did not create this work entirely yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. You will also need to state under what licensing terms it was released. Please refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file.

Please add this information by editing the image description page. If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:31, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:16, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have one on me, mate

You deserve this flagon of eurofizz, you're burptastic! OhNoPeedyPeebles (talk) 22:51, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You're close to being blocked indefinitely for being continually disruptive, but for now....

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:39, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail!

Hello, OhNoPeedyPeebles. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 22:54, 2 April 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

See message on my talk and reply there, please. Thanks, Br John. St John Chrysostom ^Δόξα_τω^Θεώ 22:54, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

John Cridland

This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a search with the contents of John Cridland, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Basil Cridland. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. MadmanBot (talk) 12:22, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited John Cridland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ACAS (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

March 2014

Hello, I'm Fraggle81. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Sanctuary Wood Museum Hill 62 because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Fraggle81 (talk) 23:33, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So you think that Sanctuary Wood has 'a unique collection of World War I items, including a rare collection of 3-dimensional photographs, weapons, uniforms, and bombs which allow you to experience what it must have been like for the soldiers'? I'm sorry. This is hyperbolic nonsense, Fraggle81. And presumptuous. And tasteless. --OhNoPeedyPeebles (talk) 18:20, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And adding the words "does not" made a difference how? I have no interest in the actual exhibit, only the page you edited. I would say the statement is subjective and probably should be reworded, but not in the manner which you did. Fraggle81 (talk) 20:19, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed! --OhNoPeedyPeebles (talk) 10:06, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:22, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, OhNoPeedyPeebles. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Vivian White (August 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia.

This submission appears to be taken from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/reporters/441602.stm. Wikipedia cannot accept material copied from elsewhere, unless it explicitly and verifiably has been released to the world under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license or into the public domain and is written in an acceptable tone—this includes material that you own the copyright to. You should attribute the content of a draft to outside sources, using citations, but copying and pasting or closely paraphrasing sources is not acceptable. The entire draft should be written using your own words and structure. Note to reviewers: do not leave copyright violations sitting in the page history. Please follow the instructions here.

You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

Draft:Vivian White may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 11:49, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! OhNoPeedyPeebles, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 11:49, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Nathan Lyon. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:57, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, OhNoPeedyPeebles. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nick Owen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chris Morris (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:40, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 2018

You have made edits on Nick Owen and Nigel Starmer-Smith which not only violated our policy on biographies of living persons, but which also used YouTube as a source. Not only is YouTube notconsidered tobe a reliable source, but there's a distinct possibility that the videos you linked to are copyright violations. Further, your edit to Talk:Gerry Gable was outright vandalism. I feel certain that if I inspected the edits you made prior to these four, I would find similar problems.

Please consider yourself warned that disruptive editing such as this is likely to lead to your being blocked from editing in the future. Violations of the BLP policy cannot take place anywhere on Wikipedia, including all talk pages, and violations of this policy are taken very seriously. Watch your step. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:01, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 2018

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Harry Maguire, you may be blocked from editing. Mattythewhite (talk) 19:30, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, OhNoPeedyPeebles. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 2019

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Nixon McLean. Your edits could be interpreted as vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. --Mondo Beer (talk) 14:36, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 2019

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Thomas Swarbrick, you may be blocked from editing. --Mondo Beer (talk) 15:33, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 2019

Hello, I'm DuncanHill. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Talk:Frederick Rolfe that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. DuncanHill (talk) 20:41, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Persistent vandalism.

OhNo, why do you persist in adding mindless and stupid false "facts" to numerous articles? It is not amusing or clever.PC 5002 (talk) 18:17, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 2019

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Primary Colors (film). Mattythewhite (talk) 18:28, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:31, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

April 2021

Welcome, and thank you for your attempt to lighten up Wikipedia. However, this is an encyclopedia and articles are intended to be serious, so please don't make joke edits, as you did to Iain Lee. Readers looking for accurate information will not find them amusing. If you'd like to experiment with editing, please use your sandbox instead, where you are given a certain degree of freedom in what you write. POLITANVM ^talk 22:19, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Eddie Hemmings (cricketer), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Geoff Lawson and Nick Cook. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]